When did COVID really first hit the UK?
I had a look at deaths of 25 to 39 year old men and women in England between 2014 and 2022 to see if there was anything insightful. Sure enough, there was plenty.
Starting with the men, it is apparent that usually there isn’t much by way of variability in season or pattern. In fact, this makes 2019/20 (red line) stand out as the only year up to that point, since June 2014, with a marked inflection during the period.
Although it occurs during the spring when the COVID pandemic was announced, the deaths start on 22nd Feb 20, a whole month before they really take off for the older age groups. If this is COVID, it would put the viral outbreak somewhere towards the end of January which is consistent with my other analyses.
Also atypically, we see deaths surge on 28th Dec 20 (green line), just 3 weeks after the mRNA experiment begins, despite having absolutely no excess death whatsoever in this age/sex group up until this point in the 2020/21 season.
Nevertheless, both years finish below seasons 2016/17 and particularly 2017/18, which was a very bad flu season for young men in England.
COVID year was the worst overall in terms of mortality for the full 12 months but in line with the prevailing, upwards trend. Impossible to say how 2021/22 is going to pan out as it looks like reports are delayed since 3rd week of October 2021, with at least 1,300 still with the coroner by my reckoning1.
But, it’s with the women where things become really startling.
Unlike the males, the female deaths show distinct seasonality with typically a single inflection some time after October. 2019/20 (red line), the year of the COVID, had a very early inflection, occurring in the 3rd week of October. It’s not possible to determine if that was COVID or not. Probably not. Probably whatever flu was dominant at the time.
But look at the inflection on 13th Feb 2020. That is uncharacteristically late in the season but much earlier than the official start of COVID death counting. More than a week before the men started dying, assuming the same infection-to-death period, this would put the viral outbreak closer to mid-Jan.
What’s the implication of this? It shows that the virus was well-established in the country by the time strict measures were implemented to try and contain transmission.
If the empirical work had been done properly, the futile but damaging measures could have been avoided.
It also means it must have been killing older folk at that time but not at remarkable levels, making you wonder even more why the deaths went off the scale post-lockdown and not before?
Again, we see the staggering impact on 28th Dec 2020 (green line), with both years (COVID and mRNA experiment) ending way outside the normal excess deaths range.
What gets me though is the 3-week period between 24th Aug and 11th Sept 2021 (black line) where 44 young women died unexpectedly (and not just a few weeks earlier than they might have done by the looks of things).
Is there something really peculiar about that time window that ought to have been investigated or do we simply run into the start of the coroner delays?
If it’s the latter, there may be something truly awful to report when the data finally becomes available.
See more here: substack.com
Header image: Kabul Hostel
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
VOWG
| #
It was, is and continues to be a flu. It will be with us as all other varieties of flus have been for thousands of years. Get used to it.
Reply
Wisenox
| #
Covid never hit anywhere.
The supposed isolation of the phony virus tells you that.
The isolation story is a claim, the recent one being from 2021, to have isolated the virus in Hong Kong. I believe the scientist was Peng Zhou.
They used a single patient and took a lung lavage (BALF) sample. Lung lavages are filled with DNA from multiple sources; they are far from clean.
Then, they added Trypsin to the sample and used de novo assembly and Targeted PCR to “isolate” the fake virus.
Trypsin breaks apart proteins (DNA) into fragments. Meaning, the sample is now just fragments of all the organisms and cells in the sample, some of which are the patient’s own DNA.
Targeted PCR is where the put a “target” sequence into the computer. Typically, this includes the beginning and ending portions of the target genome.
De novo assembly is where a computer takes all of the fragments, from every source, and attempts to create the target genome.
They fed the computer Sars1 as the target, and the computer modeled the closest genome it could given the DNA fragments provided, which again can be from anything, including the patient. This is why its an in-silico genome.
The computer was unable to match Sars1, but came close (79% match), so they called it covid. Again, the pieces could be from anything. Its analogous to taking a dictionary, breaking it up into all the words, then seeing if you could write a sentence given the first and last words.
They never isolated an effing thing.
For perspective on the 21% mismatch:
The phony genome isn ~30,000 nucleotides in length, giving us roughly 6,300 different in phony covid that phony Sars1 does NOT have. Yet, the tests claim that they cannot differentiate between the 2. That’s a red flag of bullshit, but that doesn’t stop sheep from believing it.
Additionally, humans share 99% with chimpanzees. Meaning, a small 1% difference can take you from a human to a chimp. Covid is 21% different from Sars1.
We share 60% of our genome with a banana, so you can see just how massive even small differences can make in an organism.
The only time any corona-bullshit virion, from any strain, was ever found in nature, is when they put the patented virus there testing their mRNA vaccines. They had to get it right so that it didn’t alert people too quickly, and of course they need a scary scary origin story.
Phony covid never “hit” anywhere! There was absolutely zero credible science behind its discovery or isolation.
They chose the bat as a reference to Perseus.
Reply